Evangelicalism Today: Crisis and Creeds

Part 1: The Crisis of Creedless Evangelicalism For Part 2: Confessing Creeds and Evangelicalism LINK “Evangelicalism” has become a fuzzy and amorphous word. Evangelicalism is associated with revival meetings where believers give more credence to the pronouncements of blessings by visiting ‘prophets’ and ‘apostles’ than to the plain but transforming teaching of the Bible. Preaching … Continue reading “Evangelicalism Today: Crisis and Creeds”

Part 1: The Crisis of Creedless Evangelicalism

For Part 2: Confessing Creeds and Evangelicalism LINK

“Evangelicalism” has become a fuzzy and amorphous word. Evangelicalism is associated with revival meetings where believers give more credence to the pronouncements of blessings by visiting ‘prophets’ and ‘apostles’ than to the plain but transforming teaching of the Bible. Preaching is as much about the good life of consumerism as it is about eternal life. Elsewhere, evangelicalism is seen to be a new manifestation of old-time fundamentalism which rejected advancement in science and associated faith with ignorance of modern knowledge. It is not surprising that many young evangelicals leave the movement when they go for higher studies. Some pastors who go for further theological training even lose confidence in the infallible authority and entire trustworthiness of the Bible after they imbibed the spirit of rationalism that is prevalent in the academy.

The foregoing episodes suggest that evangelicalism is facing a crisis. Continue reading “Evangelicalism Today: Crisis and Creeds”

The NIV (2011) Gender-Neutral Translation Controversy and New ‘Gold Standard’ Bible

It is astonishing to see prominent theologians like Wayne Grudem and Vern Poythress vigorously disputing with fellow evangelical theologians like Don Carson and Craig Blomberg! Indeed, the dispute is supremely important as it pertains to whether the church should adopt the New International Version for preaching and Christian education.  To avoid confusion, it should be … Continue reading “The NIV (2011) Gender-Neutral Translation Controversy and New ‘Gold Standard’ Bible”

It is astonishing to see prominent theologians like Wayne Grudem and Vern Poythress vigorously disputing with fellow evangelical theologians like Don Carson and Craig Blomberg! Indeed, the dispute is supremely important as it pertains to whether the church should adopt the New International Version for preaching and Christian education.  To avoid confusion, it should be stressed that the NIV in question is not the ‘classic’ NIV (1984), but the NIV (2011) which was published earlier in 2005 as the TNIV.

The dispute arose when scholars like Grudem and Poythress rejected the gender-neutral or gender inclusive language policy adopted by Biblica, the publisher of the NIV, on grounds that the policy often gives rise to translation that deviates from the original meaning found in the Hebrew and Greek texts. Continue reading “The NIV (2011) Gender-Neutral Translation Controversy and New ‘Gold Standard’ Bible”

Penerangan Ringkas Tentang Kepercayaan Kristian

Al-Quran menegaskan bahawa umat Islam yang awal percaya kepada apa yang diturunkan kepada Ahli Kitab – Al-Ankabut 29:46 [Believers], argue only in the best way with the People of the Book, except with those of them who act unjustly. Say, ‘We believe in what was revealed to us and in what was revealed to you; … Continue reading “Penerangan Ringkas Tentang Kepercayaan Kristian”

Al-Quran menegaskan bahawa umat Islam yang awal percaya kepada apa yang diturunkan kepada Ahli Kitab – Al-Ankabut 29:46

[Believers], argue only in the best way with the People of the Book, except with those of them who act unjustly. Say, ‘We believe in what was revealed to us and in what was revealed to you; our God and your God are one [and the same]; we are devoted to Him.’ M.A.S. Abdel Haleem

And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, “We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam).” Yusuf Ali

Dan janganlah kamu berbahas dengan Ahli Kitab melainkan dengan cara yang lebih baik, kecuali orang-orang yang berlaku zalim di antara mereka; dan katakanlah (kepada mereka): “Kami beriman kepada (Al-Quran) yang diturunkan kepada kami dan kepada (Taurat dan Injil) yang diturunkan kepada kamu; dan Tuhan kami, juga Tuhan kamu, adalah Satu; dan kepadaNyalah, kami patuh dengan berserah diri.” http://www.iium.edu.my/deed/quran/malay/

 

Walau bagaimanapun, ramai orang Islam hari ini menolak pengajaran Alkitab kerana salah faham. Untuk menyelesaikan salah faham mereka, kami ingin menawarkan penerangan ringkas tentang kepercayaan Kristian seperti yang berikut:

 

SOALAN-SOALAN LAZIM (FAQ)

JAWAPAN KEPADA PERTANYAAN YANG SERING DIAJUKAN OLEH ORANG ISLAM

1. ‘Mengapa orang Kristian percaya kepada Tritunggal? Adakah kamu percaya kepada tiga tuhan?’
Orang Kristian tidak percaya kepada tiga tuhan! Kami percaya kepada Allah yang esa sahaja, sama seperti orang Muslim. Apabila kami berkata tentang Allah Bapa, Allah Anak dan Allah Roh Kudus, ia bukan merujuk kepda tiga tuhan yang berlainan. Seperti Islam, agama Kristian adalah agama tauhid.  Istilah “Tritunggal” tidak terdapat di dalam Alkitab, tetapi idea itu diajar di dalam Alkitab.

2. ‘Mengapa kamu berkata bahawa Yesus itu “Anak Allah”?’
Kerana Yesus menyatakan dirinya sebagai ‘Anak’ dan memanggil Allah sebagai ‘Bapa’ dan ‘Bapa-Ku’. Kami tidak percaya Yesus adalah anak Allah hasil dari satu penyatuan fizikal. Idea seperti itu bertentangan dengan kepercayaan kami, sama seperti orang Islam.

Kami percaya bahawa ‘Allah itu Kasih’ di dalam persona-Nya, dan terdapat satu perhubungan kasih antara Allah Bapa, Allah Anak dan Allah Roh Kudus, bahkan sebelum dunia ini dicipta. Yesus adalah lebih daripada seorang nabi, kerana Dia adalah 100% manusia dan 100% Allah pada masa yang sama. Apabila kami merujuk kepada Yesus sebagai Anak Allah, itu adalah satu istilah yang paling mudah untuk menyatakan bahawa Yesus sama seperti Allah, dan ini tidak pernah dan tidak akan berlaku kepada mana-mana manusia lain. Apabila kita menujukan pandangan kepada Yesus, kita mempunyai satu idea tentang Allah.

 3. ‘Mengapa kamu percaya Yesus disalib?’
Kerana itu yang diajar oleh Kitab Suci. Perjanjian Baru menyatakan bukan kerana kelemahan Allah yang menyebabkan Yesus disalib, tetapi itu adalah cara-Nya untuk menunjukkan kejahatan sifat manusia yang sebenar.  Tetapi ia juga adalah cara Allah menunjukkan betapa besar kasih-Nya terhadap manusia kerana ingin mengampuni dosa kita. Orang Kristian melihat penyaliban Yesus sebagai satu ‘korban untuk penebusan dosa’ yang terakhir dan sempurna, sehingga tidak memerlukan korban lain yang selanjutnya. Allah membenarkan Yesus untuk mati kerana semua manusia akan mati apabila tiba waktunya. Tetapi dengan membangkitkan Yesus semula, Allah bukan sahaja menampakkan diri dan identiti sebenar Yesus, tetapi juga memusnahkan kuasa kematian untuk selama-lamanya bagi mereka yang percaya kepada Yesus.

4. ‘Alkitab kamu telah dipalsukan.’
Saya tahu ini adalah yang telah diajarkan kepada anda untuk sekian lama. Tetapi adakah anda pernah membaca Alkitab?  Menurut Al-Quran, mesej yang diturunkan oleh Allah kepada Nabi Muhammad mengesahkan Kitab-Kitab Suci yang terdahulu – Taurat Musa, Zabur Daud, dan Injil Yesus. Jika semua Kitab Suci tersebut yang berada di dalam tangan kaum Yahudi dan Kristian pada zaman Nabi Muhammad telah dipalsukan, bagaimanakah Al-Quran boleh mengesahkan Kitab-Kitab Suci yang dinyatakan? Bolehkah anda memberitahu saya siapa yang memalsukan Kitab-Kitab Suci tersebut, dan bilakah ia berlaku? Mahukah anda membaca riwayat Yesus yang terdapat di dalam Injil kami? Bagaimana anda boleh mendakwa bahawa Alkitab telah dipalsukan kalau anda sendiri tidak pernah membacanya?

5. ‘Alkitab penuh dengan kesilapan dan percanggahan.’
Orang Kristian tahu tentang percanggahan yang anda dapati di dalam Alkitab kerana cendekiawan Kristian telah lama mengetahui hal tersebut.  Tetapi cendekiawan Kristian mempunyai cara sendiri untuk menerangkan perkara tersebut, malah kebanyakannya boleh diterangkan dengan mudah. Yang lain memerlukan tafsiran yang lebih mendalam lagi. Adakah anda sedia untuk mendengar penjelasan kami?

Sebenarnya ini juga boleh berlaku kepada anda. Ada orang Kristian yang mengatakan bahawa ada banyak  percanggahan di dalam Al-Quran. Bagaimanakah perasaan anda jika saya mengkritik Al-Quran?  Tetapi saya tidak mahu melakukan itu kerana saya tidak berminat untuk mengkritik Al-Quran. Jika orang Islam tidak suka orang Kristian mengkritik Al-Quran, mengapakah orang Islam berbuat demikian terhadap Alkitab?

Anda mempunyai masalah dengan percanggahan di dalam Alkitab kerana anda  membuat perbandingan di antara Alkitab dengan Al-Quran.  Anda percaya bahawa Al-Quran telah diturunkan kepada Nabi Muhammad secara langsung, dan mengandaikan Injil juga sedemikian.  Orang Kristian percaya bahawa Alkitab adalah Firman Allah, dan melalui Roh Kudus Allah telah mengilhami para penulis untuk menulis kitab-kitab di dalam Alkitab. Tetapi Firman Allah di dalam Alkitab ditulis oleh ramai penulis. Jadi bagi orang Kristian, Alkitab adalah Firman Allah dan juga perkataan manusia.  Masalah asas di antara kita berdua adalah kita mempunyai pandangan yang berbeza tentang cara Firman Allah diturunkan kepada manusia. Orang Islam percaya bahawa wahyu teragung daripada Allah diturunkan di dalam bentuk sebuah buku, iaitu Al-Quran. Tetapi bagi orang Kristian, kami percaya bahawa wahyu teragung diturunkan melalui satu peribadi,  iaitu Yesus.

6. ‘Kami percaya bahawa Yesus seorang nabi. Mengapakah kamu tidak percaya bahawa Muhammad juga seorang nabi’
Kalau kami mengiktiraf Muhammad sebagai seorang nabi seperti umat Islam, maka kami semua menjadi Muslim. Kami dengan sukacitanya menerima ajaran daripada Al-Quran bahawa Allah itu Esa, sama seperti yang diajar di dalam Alkitab. Tetapi kami tidak percaya pada seluruh Al-Quran kerana pengajarannya berbeza dan bercanggah dengan ajaran di dalam Kitab Suci kami.

Kami percaya bahawa Yesus adalah nabi yang terakhir, Kalimahtullah yang terunggul dan terakhir untuk seluruh dunia. Yesus adalah wahyu Allah yang sempurna dan lengkap di dalam bentuk manusia, dan kami tidak percaya bahawa terdapat wahyu yang lebih sempurna tentang Allah selepas Yesus.

7. ‘Mengapa kamu tidak percaya bahawa Alkitab bernubuat tentang kedatangan Muhammad?’
Ada dua ayat Alkitab yang sering dipetik untuk menyampaikan idea tersebut. Yang pertama dipetik daripada kitab Ulangan, di mana terdapat nubuatan tentang seorang nabi yang akan datang: ‘Seorang nabi dari tengah-tengahmu, dari antara saudara-saudaramu,  sama seperti aku, akan dibangkitkan bagimu oleh TUHAN, Allahmu; dialah yang harus kamu dengarkan.’ (Ulangan 18:15).  Ini tidak mungkin merujuk kepada Muhammad kerana Musa berkata nabi tersebut akan datang ‘dari antara saudara-saudaramu’, iaitu dari bani Israel.

Ayat kedua adalah pernyataan Yesus tentang kedatangan seorang Paraclete: ‘Aku akan minta kepada Bapa, dan Dia akan memberikan kepadamu seorang Penolong yang lain, supaya Dia menyertai kamu selama-lamanya.’ (Yohanes 14:16; sila rujuk juga kepada 14:26, 15:26, 16:7). Orang Kristian sentiasa mentafsirkan kata-kata Yesus ini tentang kedatangan Roh Kudus. Yesus tidak pernah bercakap tentang seorang nabi yang akan datang selepas Dia.

Sumber: Colin Chapman, The Cross and the Crescent IVP Books 2008.

Artikel Berkaitan – FAQ: JAWAPAN KEPADA SOALAN-SOALAN ORANG ISLAM

Jawapan Kepada Soalan-Soalan Orang Islam

Kesusasteraan polemik yang menyerang kepercayaan Kristian mudah didapati di kebanyakan kedai-kedai buku di Malaysia. Namun daripada merasa takut, umat Kristian mengalu-alukan serangan seperti itu kerana ia memberikan peluang kepada orang Kristian untuk menjelaskan iman mereka. Tetapi dengan tulus hormatilah Kristus sebagai Tuhan dalam hidup kamu. Hendaklah kamu sentiasa bersedia memberikan jawapan kepada sesiapa sahaja yang … Continue reading “Jawapan Kepada Soalan-Soalan Orang Islam”

Kesusasteraan polemik yang menyerang kepercayaan Kristian mudah didapati di kebanyakan kedai-kedai buku di Malaysia. Namun daripada merasa takut, umat Kristian mengalu-alukan serangan seperti itu kerana ia memberikan peluang kepada orang Kristian untuk menjelaskan iman mereka.

Tetapi dengan tulus hormatilah Kristus sebagai Tuhan dalam hidup kamu. Hendaklah kamu sentiasa bersedia memberikan jawapan kepada sesiapa sahaja yang meminta kamu menjelaskan harapan yang kamu miliki. Tetapi lakukanlah hal itu dengan lemah lembut dan hormat. Hendaklah hati nurani kamu murni, supaya apabila kamu difitnah kerana hidup dengan baik sebagai pengikut Kristus, orang yang memfitnah kamu itu akan menjadi malu (1Petrus 3:15-16).

Lebih penting lagi, ada orang Islam yang secara ikhlas bertanya soalan mengenai kepercayaan Kristian dalam mencari persefahaman antara agama. Untuk orang-orang Muslim yang ikhlas seperti inilah kami tawarkan, “Jawapan Kepada Soalan-Soalan Orang Islam”. Semoga Allah memberkati umat Kristian dan umat Islam di Malaysia dengan persefahaman dan saling menghormati.

 

FAQ: JAWAPAN KEPADA SOALAN-SOALAN ORANG ISLAM Continue reading “Jawapan Kepada Soalan-Soalan Orang Islam”

The Bible Does not Teach Uncritical Submission and Blind Obedience to the State

Related Article: Between Romans 13 and Revelation 13 LINK I. Understanding Romans 13:1-7 in Context. There has been a controversy in the media sparked off by a comment made by the leader of the Christians for Peace and Harmony Malaysia (CPHM) who urged Christians “to submit to and obey the government and those God had … Continue reading “The Bible Does not Teach Uncritical Submission and Blind Obedience to the State”

Related Article: Between Romans 13 and Revelation 13 LINK

I. Understanding Romans 13:1-7 in Context.
There has been a controversy in the media sparked off by a comment made by the leader of the Christians for Peace and Harmony Malaysia (CPHM) who urged Christians “to submit to and obey the government and those God had put in authority.” The leader added, “So don’t look at the person, as long as he is in position, the Scripture teaches us to honour and respect authority.”

Detractors protest that the comment is inappropriate as it takes a scriptural text out of context, to be used as a pretext for what is politically partisan. Indeed, many totalitarian states have caused much grief to the church when they sought to exploit this passage to justify their demand for unconditional submission from any Christian citizen who resists abusive authorities. We need therefore to emphasize that Paul’s call for submission is circumscribed by certain presuppositions. Continue reading “The Bible Does not Teach Uncritical Submission and Blind Obedience to the State”

Reading the Bible as God’s Word: The Redemptive Historical Method and Progressive Revelation. Part 2

To read Part 1 of this article – Reading the Bible as God’s Word: The Redemptive Historical Method and Progressive Revelation. Part 1 I. What is the Redemptive Historical Method (RHM)? The Redemptive Historical Method (RHM) is based on three affirmations: 1) RHM is Christo-centric. The RHM begins with the assumption that God’s plan of … Continue reading “Reading the Bible as God’s Word: The Redemptive Historical Method and Progressive Revelation. Part 2”

To read Part 1 of this article – Reading the Bible as God’s Word: The Redemptive Historical Method and Progressive Revelation. Part 1

I. What is the Redemptive Historical Method (RHM)?

The Redemptive Historical Method (RHM) is based on three affirmations:

1) RHM is Christo-centric. The RHM begins with the assumption that God’s plan of salvation for humankind was progressively revealed in mighty acts and prophetic word through various divinely appointed human agents in the history of Israel. RHM affirms the finality of Scripture as “God has in the past revealed long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son [Jesus Christ].” (Heb. 1:1-2)

2) RHM affirms that the Bible has a coherent message, with Christ as its centre and final fulfilment.
Jesus said to the two disciples on the Emmaus road, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?” And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself (Luke 24: 25-27).

3) RHM affirms the divine inspiration and sufficiency of Scripture. As Paul writes, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” The Westminster Confession of Faith puts it succinctly, “The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture.” (1:6)

It should be clear that these affirmations result in a “hermeneutic of affirmation” rather than a “hermeneutic of suspicion” that is prevalent within the dominant paradigm of historical criticism. To read the Bible is not to dissect a lifeless ancient document. It is to approach the Bible humbly with expectation that the Bible as the living Word of God also reads us and speaks to us. Continue reading “Reading the Bible as God’s Word: The Redemptive Historical Method and Progressive Revelation. Part 2”

Reading the Bible as God’s Word: The Redemptive Historical Method and Progressive Revelation. Part 1

This article is dedicated to the seminary student who is troubled by the “methodological atheism” framework of contemporary historical criticism, and is looking for a believing scholarship that is consistent with the Church’s affirmation of the Bible as the Word of God. To read Part 2 of this article – Reading the Bible as God’s … Continue reading “Reading the Bible as God’s Word: The Redemptive Historical Method and Progressive Revelation. Part 1”

This article is dedicated to the seminary student who is troubled by the “methodological atheism” framework of contemporary historical criticism, and is looking for a believing scholarship that is consistent with the Church’s affirmation of the Bible as the Word of God.

To read Part 2 of this article – Reading the Bible as God’s Word: The Redemptive Historical Method and Progressive Revelation. Part 2

I. The Challenge of “Methodological Atheism” and the Historical-Critical Method

Seminary studies is vital for equipping aspiring pastors with skills in biblical interpretation. However, seminary studies may prove to be hazardous for some students when they are introduced to critical scholarship which treats the Bible just like any other Ancient Near Eastern texts. Students are told that the origins of the Bible is obscure because of its antiquity and because the authors of the biblical texts in truth are anonymous. The historical reliability of the Bible is cast in doubt as critical historians (the biblical minimalists) privilege silent excavated artifacts over informative historical texts and declare that the Bible contains more myths than history. Finally, critical scholars conclude that alleged cultural and religious commonalities between biblical stories and ancient mythological texts render questionable, the traditional Christian belief that the Bible is unique because of its divine origins. Students who are overwhelmed by these critical ideas soon lose their passion for preaching and pastoral ministry.

Critical scholarship is alluring because of its claim to be a rational inquiry that continuously advances the frontiers of religious knowledge, in contrast to conservative scholarship that is constrained by dogmatic authority. To be sure, this Enlightenment inspired narrative has been contested by recent scholarship. However, rather than outlining an alternative historiography which can be both intellectually robust and consistent with the biblical worldview, this article shall focus on how critical scholarship based on “methodological atheism” challenges the faith of students. Continue reading “Reading the Bible as God’s Word: The Redemptive Historical Method and Progressive Revelation. Part 1”

Kairos Dialogue Network Conference on Shaping a Shared Future in Malaysia

Kairos Dialogue Network would like to invite Christians in Malaysia to a one day conference on Saturday, 11 July 2015 at Luther Centre. The Facebook link is here:  https://www.facebook.com/kairosdialoguenetwork/posts/884292154960172  LINK The purpose of this conference is to launch and share a Christian social vision for a shared future in Malaysia.  Kairos Dialogue Network invites all … Continue reading “Kairos Dialogue Network Conference on Shaping a Shared Future in Malaysia”

Kairos Dialogue Network would like to invite Christians in Malaysia to a one day conference on Saturday, 11 July 2015 at Luther Centre.

The Facebook link is here:  https://www.facebook.com/kairosdialoguenetwork/posts/884292154960172  LINK

The purpose of this conference is to launch and share a Christian social vision for a shared future in Malaysia.  Kairos Dialogue Network invites all Christians from different denominations to support one another and commit themselves towards transformative actions at the individual, church, community, and national levels.

For more information on the programme and speakers please refer to the attachment with this email. Continue reading “Kairos Dialogue Network Conference on Shaping a Shared Future in Malaysia”

Holiness and the Social Witness of the Church

“Strive for peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord.” (Hebrews 12:14) It is encouraging that many Christians are actively engaging social-political issues to build a better society. Their coordinated and concerted efforts have gained them publicity and respectability; indeed, they may have won new ‘friends’ in the … Continue reading “Holiness and the Social Witness of the Church”

“Strive for peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord.” (Hebrews 12:14)

It is encouraging that many Christians are actively engaging social-political issues to build a better society. Their coordinated and concerted efforts have gained them publicity and respectability; indeed, they may have won new ‘friends’ in the high places of political power. On the other hand, the elements of ungodliness, be they militant gays, permissive postmodernists or cynical atheists resolutely resist and reject any effort to infuse Christian values into society at large. Some religious extremists even threaten the safety and well-being of churches. These forces seem determined to plunge society headlong to self-destruction.

It remains an open question, then, as to whether the Christians will succeed in arresting the disintegration of society. It will be easy for Christian social engagement to wane when the unbelievers persist in hardening their hearts. Christian activism must be backed by Christian holiness if the recent gains are to be lasting. We must heed J.C. Ryle’s warning in his classic book, Holiness* that “Sound Protestant and Evangelical doctrine is useless if it is not accompanied by a holy life. It is more than useless: it does positive harm. It is despised by keen-sighted and shrewd men of the world, as an unreal and hollow thing, and brings religion into contempt” (p. xxi). Or in J.I. Packer’s words, “Credible opposition to secular ideologies can be shown by speaking and writing but credible oppositions to holiness can only be shown by holy living.”/Keep in Step with the Spirit (Revel Pub 1984), pp. 102-103./  Perhaps this is what Heb. 12:14 means: “Strive for peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord.” Continue reading “Holiness and the Social Witness of the Church”

Call for Rational Debate of Hudud and Implementation of Syariah Compliant Govenment Policies on Non-Muslims

It is encouraging to find Malaysians across the race-and-religion divide coming together to call for rational debate on hudud and the related Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code (1993), and affirming that: – As all Malaysians, Muslims or non-Muslims, Kelantanese or non-Kelantanese, are rightful stakeholders in the enforcement of KSCC, no one should be penalised, threatened or … Continue reading “Call for Rational Debate of Hudud and Implementation of Syariah Compliant Govenment Policies on Non-Muslims”

It is encouraging to find Malaysians across the race-and-religion divide coming together to call for rational debate on hudud and the related Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code (1993), and affirming that:

– As all Malaysians, Muslims or non-Muslims, Kelantanese or non-Kelantanese, are rightful stakeholders in the enforcement of KSCC, no one should be penalised, threatened or ridiculed for having or expressing any opinion on the matter.

– The success of Islamic banking in winning over the hearts and minds of non-Muslims through rigour and proven benefits, rather than a deceiving assurance of non-Muslim exclusion or a sloppy “trial-and-error” attitude, should be an inspiring example.

– The implementation of KSCC must not be decided on a winner-takes-all manner, such as a simple majority in the Dewan Rakyat, for this will risk tearing the country apart.

– The inclusive spirit of the Federal Constitution and the 1963 Malaysia Agreement, which lay down the secular basis of the Federation of Malaysia, must be upheld.

First, the provisions of the Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code is so evidently ultra vires the Federal Constitution that there is a prima facie case to reject it out of hand. It is agreed that the call for rational dialogue should not be restricted to debating whether one should support or oppose hudud. It is a call to all Malaysians to respect the provision related to the status of Islam and other religions in the Federal Constitution which is premised on a secular framework. Put concretely, the starting point for dialogue should be the original intent of the Federal Constitution as a secular-state where there is no establishment of religion, or  provision for a dominating position for Islam. In this regard hudud or any Islamic law should not be part of our legal system, except in matters of personal law specifically enumerated in the Constitution. See related post: Malaysia Social Contract (Part 1): Religion and Equal Citizenship and Historic Documents on the drafting of the Constitution.

Second, the rational debate should publicly call into question not only the overt hudud agenda of the Kelantan government, but also the arguably, clandestine introduction of syariah compliant provisions in various State enactments in UMNO dominated State Legislative Assemblies (Dewan Undangan Negeri), and imposition of syariah compliant policies in the government departments affecting non-Muslims. Hudud naturally elicits strong and vocal opposition from all reasonable Malaysians as its implementation is an obvious and undeniable act of injustice against non-Muslims. In contrast, the introduction of syariah compliant laws and departmental policies are subtly and incrementally implemented so that non-Muslims remain unaware of the gradual erosion of their fundamental liberties.

In either case, the inclusive spirit and universal justice enshrined in the Federal Constitution would be shattered by the fatal blow of hudud, or gradually extinguished by the covertly introduced syariah compliant laws of the State Legislative Assemblies and government department policies. Continue reading “Call for Rational Debate of Hudud and Implementation of Syariah Compliant Govenment Policies on Non-Muslims”